 Pamela Young did a good report and I feel like I believe she said there was no abuse of power and I assumed I really felt like there was an abuse of authority. Let's not play too much with those words but I felt like there were legal and I think she referenced according to state law now I could be wrong because I haven't looked at her report in several weeks. She did what she was supposed to do. And she was attacked at the beginning of the meeting. And there was reason for that rage and that anger, but it was still an attack. And we have to come to, and we're doing that to each other. The original council really needs to open up and find a way to really have honest discussions among ourselves, and we, we have to do that publicly, or we could, you know, I'm shall and I and I will not offer you another chance to do an anti racism training, which is the original council thought tooth and nail and minimally changed from. I'm asking you each to look at yourself. And I'm saying this to the members of the Community Safety and Social Justice Committee. I'm saying it to the former members of the Community Safety Working Group. I'm saying it to our police department. I'm saying it to our town manager and our staff, whatever their position is in the town. Look at yourself, because we have automatic responses that are damaging to others. We often don't even know they're there. And when we do know they're there we don't try to fix it very often. And we need to fix this and there's no easy fix. So God damn it. When are we going to get together and really talk. When are we going to get together. So we can stop feeling scared to say whatever we think is the only way that we're going to learn is by making mistakes. I, I part of the emotion and I'm making an assumption here Lynn so correct me if I'm wrong. Part of the assault. We, we were so into shaming and blaming that it becomes almost impossible for an intelligent person to write a letter. So I really want us to look at ourselves and to think about what we're doing to think about how we hurt others. And what we can do to change. So that all voices really are heard. And I'll go back to something and I'm then I'm going to shut up because I know I'm taking too much time. If you didn't feel like you got what you wanted. Doesn't mean you weren't heard. And we have to take the next steps and assume some basis of for collaboration. That's enough for me. Thanks. Dorothy. I'm coming back to the letter. The letter that was written is not the letter we want to send at this time. However, I think some letter must be sent because people are tired of not getting an answer. I think that you were right on target Lynn when you said that we have to talk about what we can do and what we can't do. So I'm thinking that maybe a very simple letter in which you just tell the truth, which is certain things that council can do. And some things we can't do. And we understand their frustration and we will try to work to accomplish some of the things that the people from the CSS JC have asked for. I mean, words can't do it all. Okay. And I know that we who believe in the word sometimes get hung up and think that they can, but you said, we really can't do and the town council doesn't have the power to do some of the things that they want us to do. But can we do what remains to be done. And where do they turn. I do think you need to have, we need to write an answer because a letter because there's been a very deep sense of frustration of, you know, the committee reaching out and feeling that no one is listening. We are listening. The matter is very complex. We don't have the answers, but this is what we can do or what we can't do and that we're hoping to work with them on helping solve some of the problems. That's what the letter says already. And it just says we can't ever get a report from the police. And I don't think that I don't accept that so I think that they can under their own terms may want to give some kind of response. Now, the word investigative is a word I think that, you know, I don't think I'd like to give an investigative report myself. Okay, but a report is another matter. I moved to postpone this discussion to November 7 at 9pm. Second, you postponed this. The date the letter. I didn't hear you. Yes, the discussion and letter to November 7 at 9pm. Okay, there is been a motion to move. There's been a motion to postpone the discussion to November 7 at 9pm. It's been seconded further discussion. Alicia. Thank you so I was. Sorry, it's hard because I just got changed in the direction of where I was going with this, but I agree. I agree with Dorothy in what she just said. And I also agree with the sentiments of like moving away from this conversation. However, I don't think we should revisit the conversation of the letter on November 7 because I think we need to have a different discussion on November 7 and not the contents of this letter specifically. And so I would hope that we could actually just like table this whole letter and and schedule for a conversation. And I think we should have a bigger conversation about all of these topics because I think I agree that we should have a bigger conversation that this is a really deep conversation a really challenging conversation that we maybe did not spend enough time on. And that that might be scheduled for the seven. And I think that it might be even helpful to invite the CSS JC to come have a discussion with us on November 7 because we don't have a response and we don't have a letter for them, because it doesn't mean this meeting is going to result in a response to CSS JC. And so maybe that could be a way to tie all things together in terms of mending their frustrations building relationships, moving forward, making sure everyone's heard, not rushing things but also still making things move along I think not coming back to this specific letter but still moving forward in this conversation on the seventh is something I'd be interested in. So I think like, maybe an amendment to this motion I would support but not specifically just coming back to this letter and your amendment to the motion. Maybe. Oh, sorry, go ahead. I would be happy to change it to a motion to table. And then would that still allow us to have a conversation on the seventh, not regarding the specific letter but like this topic in general. Yeah. Yes, it'd be absolutely. I would be in agreement to that my hope. Sorry, my only second part of that is that would it be possible to invite the CSS JC to at least a portion of that conversation. We can do whatever the council has asked. So, the right now the motion is to table and that's been seconded. The other motion was withdrawn, we're just going on to the new motion, the motion is to table the letter that's been seconded, then Alicia is asking that on the seventh. Just, oh, I'm just, that might not be a wise meeting to invite other committees given what's already scheduled for that meeting. And the time we start. I think that's something that needs discussed out of committee out of council meeting. I think the date for when we do this is I mean I'm looking at future agendas and I'm just going yeah right. I'm not saying we shouldn't have a conversation and I'm certainly not saying we shouldn't invite CSS JC, but I'm trying to figure out when we can do that. And given everything else that we need to get done. So, Alicia. So, are you satisfied with the motion to table the letter, and that's one motion and then the other one is to look for a time when we can jointly meet with CSS JC to discuss next steps. I would support the motion to table, but I would probably suppose propose a different motion after. So if we want to, because I don't think we should just look for a meeting I think we should just schedule one. So I don't know if we want to move forward with the motion to table first and then take up the second issue or if you're trying to push them together. Let's deal with the motion to table is there any further discussion on the motion, motion to table and I will just recognize that other people Michelle pat and and shall any have their hands up. If you would like to speak to this leave your hand up if not I'll come back to you in that order. Okay Michelle. Thank you for this motion. I also want to point out that at least several of the members of the committee are in the attendees and so while we don't have a letter immediately. I have a lot of awareness that we are having this dialogue and discussion and I think that's a positive thing. What I'm most wondering about is why Mandy recommended the seventh and why we wouldn't take this up at our very next meeting. It's not a big agenda, but this is now four months in the making that we haven't dealt with this and it's, I see absolutely no reason why we would carry it on any longer and I would strongly recommend that we take it up on the 17th with the community safety and social justice committee for some portion of that. If, would it be like whatever we decide is the next when we're going to talk about this again, would it be possible to get more information with respect to some of the things that we've put forward in terms of, you know, what led up to that what has been the outreach to the youth and any other information that can be shared and I think that should help us determine when we have this discussion is when we're able to get that information. So that was one thing I wanted to say and I just wanted to say that now we may not get a chance later but you know as we're having these conversations is something related to what Pat said, and I just want to invite us to bring in the value that we added recently and which is we value allowing people the space to be human to make mistakes and to learn and grow from those mistakes to experience adverse situations without thinking of themselves or others as lesser than and to be their authentic cells. And I'm hoping that this we really hold this value to our hearts and as we make space for all of us, as Pat invited us to do as we reflect on our own values and mistakes we may have made in this process and make space for other people also in this process whether it's town staff whether it was the youth whether it's CSS JC or, you know, all of us can we work towards we are collectively responsible for creating the space that makes space for grace that makes space for all of us to really have these honest conversations and see where did the mistake happen. And it's okay that that happened but how can we correct that. And then what was the harm. If any because we have a none of us have spoken to the youth or have information we know anonymously. And if we attended any of the CSI which I have been watching some of the meetings, there is some letters anonymously but we don't know how many families. There was no real document there just heard it but I didn't see a written letter unless it's come forward. This means there are all these different pieces of information. And then as what is our role as a town counselor, I don't feel it is to tell Paul or DEI how they should work. But it is our role in my mind, it is our role to create the safe spaces for when community reaches out to us with an issue. The same with I mean it's not the same obviously this is a much more profound issue, but even with small issues like potholes and all when people reach us we don't say that's not our purview. We write to Paul and we create a space and advocate for a residence and this is a much deeper profound issue impacting so many people. So I really do feel it's our role to hold that space where we can all have this conversation to make sure that the residents are heard and that we are making sure that the town staff is communicating and about what is happening. So, all that to say that maybe the next meeting date should be decided based on hearing from Paul when he thinks that we could get more information. Paul are you prepared to answer that question at this point. So I can confer with the DEI director, I, you know, I think she feels that her report was very thorough and professionally done and address the issues, the issues of law and the issues at hand. I can talk with her tomorrow about what additional information the police department might be releasing. As I said earlier, I believe the police chief intends to to address some of these issues. And I value what the counselors have said tonight and, you know, so Alicia brought up some points about, you know, how do we respond, what do we learn and what how do we respond to situations like this going forward. I think we have learned a lot and I think we have a very valuable employees, especially in our police chief and our DEI director, and we can set protocols for how we address things going forward. And more in a way that's more attuned with what the community is expecting. I do have to say with everything going on that, you know, our police department is superior and, you know, it's really hard to work for this town. And it's not just police department, a lot of employees feel this way. And I appreciate what Shalini is saying about safe space and I think that that's really important. But retaining quality employees is a big challenge for us right now. And so we work really hard to engage our employees to be in to stay involved with our community and to be aligned with our communities needs. But I think it's a real challenge is all I'm going to say. Pat. It's a huge challenge for all of us. And what I would like to see is not time set aside in a council meeting where the community safety and social justice committee gets invited in to talk with us. I think we need to set up the separate time whether we call it a retreat or whatever, where the community safety and social justice committee member the former members of the community safety working group. And then the council and get together and begin to have some kind of conversation. And I know that has to be public. And I think that's a risk that we can take. I also would be. My recommendation is that we set aside time that specifically for us to learn how to talk with each other and collaborate with each other. And if we're not going to do that, then we're going to have like all the pressures of Well, I gave them an hour. What more do they want, you know, or, or whatever or I didn't. I think we need to set aside real time. Separate from a council meeting. We need to see each other as the flawed beings that we are, that we all are, including members of the community safety and social justice committee. So that I, I don't know whether I'm by make a motion that we set aside and with a retreat time and do it in the next do it in the next two months. I think that's, let's do that, but let's deal with the motion that's on the table. I'm sorry to be bureaucratic about this. No, that's fine. Motion on the table is to table the letter. It's been made and seconded. Are there any other comments about tabling the discussion regarding the letter. It's not to a time certain it's just to table it. Okay, I think this is related to tabling that even though we're tabling the letter but can you still just write a letter to that CSS JC that we had this conversation and it's we've realized the complexity blah, blah, blah. And that so we are just to keep them informed in a formal way. That we, we did have this and we want to do this in a more thoughtful way. And so we have tabled it just so even though we're tabling it, you will still write a formal letter. I can communicate that either letter or email to them. Yes. Thank you. Any further discussion on the motion. Then we're going to move to vote on the motion to table. And the motion. We'll begin with the Nica. Yes. Michelle. Hi. Dorothy. Yes. Pam. Yes. Kathy. Yes. Andy. Yes. Jennifer. Yes. Alicia. Yes. Yes. Melanie. Yes. Pat DeAngelis. Hi. Anna. Hi. Then Greece person. I'm Andy Joe. Hi. It's unanimous to table. All right. So then I've heard several suggestions. One is to establish a date and time certain that we would meet with the CSS JC. If we're going to have a discussion with. Perhaps members that were part of the CSWG. I would even suggest the human rights commission. If we're going to have that discussion. Since they are also involved in many of these issues. But let's see what people have to say. Alicia. Thank you. Thank you. And so yes, I agree with that. I think we can go ahead and get it to our agenda. Because again, like we said, this is a very complex issue. We can see that it can take up a lot of time. And I do not think one conversation will be a mess. I also think that they are different. Semi different topics. Like this is regarding specifics of like. Town council process and town council actions. And that we should have that discussion. And I think that we should have that discussion. And I think that we should have that discussion. And I think that we should have something separate. And aside from having a conversation with the CSS. JC and. Former CSWG members and the human rights commission. Out of retreat. I think both. Like I don't think it's a one or the other kind of thing. And I think like I understand our agenda. Are really long and our meetings go very late. However, I agree with Michelle. I think that there needs to be more than one conversation. And I think that we need to prioritize because it has already been a significant amount of time. And that maybe we could do something like adding it to the next agenda item and putting a time limit because there will be an additional retreat. Also scheduled. But I think that there needs to be more than one conversation. Yeah. And you are suggesting that on the 17th. That the CSS JC who is asked to come back to a meeting. I mean, I want to be. I think that the CSJC, I think that the CSJC, I think that the CSJC structure went in and for what purpose, but you're suggesting that we have. A meeting. Part of our meeting on the 17th. Be with the CSS JC. The purpose of. And this is what I need to know. So yes, so I think we should talk more specifically about like. The council process in regards to this specific. The council process. We talked a lot about like, this is not what the council is supposed to be doing. So like, what are we supposed to be doing? And what do we agree? Is the right. Or correct council response. Also, we talked a little bit about getting more information and that Paul would be outweaching. So also maybe an update from Paul in regards to what he was able to find out when he did reach out to X, Y and Z. And basically just like an update of all of those things. And so we're going to be talking about what the, what the, what the plans are. And maybe we can set a time limit on that so that we can have it at the next meeting. We can have the CSS. JC be there and not. Have it. Affect are very long already. Agenda, but that we know that we are starting the conversation and that it will be continued in a retreat style where that. Conversation can be completely dedicated to this topic. I just worry about the amount of time. That we're going to have. We're going to have to schedule a retreat where all members of all committees can be there. And this can happen. So I would like that conversation to be started more immediately. And that we can then look at continuing it in a more in-depth way. Okay. Dorothy. So, Alicia, when you say you want the CSS JC to be there, can you talk about it? That you're not as prevalent as panelists, or do you mean in the picture with us as members who can raise their hands and talk? Yeah, like a part of the conversation. Because I think that. Especially because we were unable to respond to their letter. I think that is just helpful. Like, we can let them know, Hey, this is the update. This is what Paul is telling us. They, like Michelle said, a lot of them are here tonight. So I know a lot of them have heard the conversation. And I think that is just helpful. And I think that is just helpful. And I think that is just helpful. And I think that is just helpful. And I think that Michelle said that she would be willing to send an email update. So I don't think that they'll be completely lost, but I do think that there are things that have not been covered because we didn't respond to their letter. And we are tabling this and we won't be able to come back to it. That should be addressed more or talked about at least. A little bit more immediately. And that we can recognize and acknowledge that. One conversation is not going to solve any of these things. It's not going to solve any of these things. It's not going to solve any of these things. It's not going to be willing and wanting to do something like that before scheduling the retreat itself. And that could also be a conversation at the meeting. Good. Good. I like that. Shalini. I definitely feel we have to have that conversation with CSS JC, but my. But for the first two parts of what we're talking about is. What is the first part of the conversation that we're going to discuss? And then the second part of the conversation that we handle, I don't see a role that CSS JC plays in that in the first part of that conversation for sure. And then the second thing is. I'm hoping to get some more updates and information from Paul. And that again, I think the council needs to process that together in terms of what do we do with this? And how do we use this information? And how do we respond to CSS JC going to be based on what we're hearing? And then we invite CSS JC after that. And I think the other angle that when we are talking about is, you know, we're starting to formalize this a little bit more in TSO. When we talk about community engagement. In terms of how are we interacting with the different committees, like ECAC, when there's an environmental issue, we are like, okay, we need to contact tack or the commission at our ECAC committee. And similarly, I think we need to just bring and clarify in terms of how are we going to collaborate more with CSS JC on the different sorts of issues and sort of to formalize that as well. And then we talk to CSS JC. Okay. This is what we've come up with. What do you feel? What is your, you know, feedback response to that? Alicia. I, like, I definitely see where Shalini is going. And I partially agree, which is why I wanted to invite them to a portion of the conversation because I know they would have, like they don't have much to do with the council process, although I think that is an important piece that has come up tonight that we should discuss, which is what I meant by that. That that's something that we should discuss and probably soon, because again, a lot of time has passed. And so again, my other issue with the waiting and doing this is that the amount of time that has passed in the amount of time we've already waited and we already thought information would be available. That was not, and it's been months. And so even though we think we can get that information quickly now, we can just start the process is my thought and that why come up with something and then run it by them when we can just collectively do it together in a meeting. Mandy Joe. I don't support another conversation on the 17th. I'm looking at the agenda. The meeting starts at 530. We haven't yet gotten to one of the discussion items we wanted to get to today. It's 1130 now. We won't even start business until 645 after a public forum. At that meeting, there's a tax classification hearing. There's a lot of other stuff. We're supposed to get water by law and regulations, which will have a long conversation. We're a council that is meant to act. And yes, we require some discussions, but we're not going to do that. We're not going to do that. We're not going to do that. If we were to put anything on the 17th, that is discussion based only because there's no action associated with it at this time or proposed action associated with it. Related to this topic. I would ask. That it be put after all of the action items on the agenda so that we can make sure our business gets done first. Okay. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I said and try to figure out. We're going to do it. And Anna, I know you're there to help me do that. I got you. Okay, we can do it. All right. Mandy Joe. Yeah. Next item. Is rental permitting bylaw. How would you like to proceed? I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm not. Oh, you mean. So are you suggesting you want to do this. As part of the 530. Well, I want it in addition to the 530, if people don't want the conversation tonight because the, there's only an hour next week. And the entire bylaw will take at least that long to get feedback on. These are three specific areas. I don't want it to cut into the planned discussion next week. So I'm happy to postpone it. Two weeks from now to two weeks from now, if it does not cut into that hour and gets added to the agenda in another part, or we could try and conclude this discussion fairly quickly tonight. I did write a fairly good memo, I think. You did write an expansive memo. Why don't we. Why don't we try to see whether people have some things that they want to consider with this. Alicia, you have your hand up. Yeah, sorry, because I didn't think I was ready to move on from the last topic because I was trying to make a motion. I wasn't trying to just move on because I wanted to have a resolution. And so if. Like the least of what I was asking is that we put a time limit. A time. Conversation on the next agenda and invite the CSS JC and at least discuss. Finding a time for our retreat or for a more in-depth conversation at the very least be put on our next agenda. I don't feel like we should just. Because then how will something happen at our next meeting if we're ending this meeting without even talking about it. Can I ask. Would it be possible if I request a CSS JC. That I come to a meeting with them to see if they are willing to have a retreat. I'm trying to figure out how to. Trying to figure out how to set this up so that we don't spend time debating whether we should have a retreat. I think it's about finding figuring out the best time and like Pat said, the best way to be in conversation and in community with each other. And so if they have a different idea as to how they would like to be. Communicating with us in depth, then that's fine. But I'm. Hoping that they would all agree that a retreat would be a good way that we can all get this conversation across. And coming to that agreement. Quickly. So like it's more about the timeframe for me necessarily. And not pushing this off to take even longer to make a decision as to how to move forward. And to putting it forward so that we can move forward quickly. And so it's more about the timeframe for me. Then it is about. Just finding out if they'd be interested in having a retreat. Paul, do you know when CSS JC is meeting again. Okay. I think I looked for that earlier today and we couldn't find it. It's on the 12th of October. Okay. So we would be able to have an idea for our next meeting, how they would want. Cause I want, I want to be able to be in conversation with them in a way that makes sense for them. Right. And in a way that would be meaningful for us so that we can move forward in a way that's comfortable for all of the counselors. In a timely manner. Okay. If it's acceptable, then I would ask CSS JC, whether I would be able to come to their meeting to discuss this. If there are other counselors who would like to do that. I'm more than glad to have that happened. If it's more than seven, well, it may need to be careful about subcommittees too. If it gets to be too many, we have to post it as a joint meeting. And I, I really want to make sure we're not intruding on. CSS JC's meetings and also their progress forward. So. Let me reach out and see whether what we can do with that. Dorothy. I had my hand up to second Alicia's. Motion. Okay. And Alicia repeat your motion. Was that we add to the agenda for our next meeting in a time limited frame. A conversation with the CSS JC, at least to figure out in what way they want to be in communication and conversation with us to be able to move forward. So if that be scheduling the retreat with them, that's fine, but if they do not want to retreat with us and they want to be in communication with us in some other way, I think we can at least establish that. Okay. Their motion has been made and seconded. Is there further discussion? Michelle. Was there a second on the motion? Yes. Oh, okay. I'm tired. I am wondering if it's possible. Lynn, for you to contact the chairs of the committee and. Talk about the various options so that possibly in this time limited meeting that we would have on the 17th, we might be able to get into some content. And maybe you with the chairs could mutually agree on, on how that might look so that we can maybe get that piece out of the way in advance. And I don't know if that impacts the motion. And I'm just wanting to ask Alicia, if. Lynn was able to establish some of that prior to the meeting on the 17th, would that be acceptable for us to then move into some discussion on the 17th? Yeah, absolutely. I was just trying to figure out a way to make this happen more quickly than waiting for the meeting. And I'm just wondering, if we can get into some discussion on that. Yeah, absolutely. I was just trying to figure out a way to make this happen more quickly than waiting. To figure out when we can even talk to them about it. Which is what I was getting out of how we ended the conversation before. So I'm like open to suggestions, but I think that I want to be in communication with them. As soon as possible, even if it's for a limited amount of time. Yeah. And whether or not we can get into actual issues and limited time. I'm not sure if that's acceptable, but maybe we can at least agree on what the issues are that we are going to jointly discuss. Is that. Yes. Pam. Pam. Oh. Okay. Things just happened at this hour of the night. Are there any further questions? There's motion. It's been made in seconded. And we're going to bring it to a vote. Please repeat the motion. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Can you repeat the motion, please? To add to the next council meeting agenda, a time limited conversation with the CSS JC to have a conversation about how to move forward. Okay. We're going to start the vote with. Michelle. I. Dorothy. Yes. Pam Rooney. Yes. Happy. Epstein. I'm abstaining because I'm not going to be at the next council meeting. I have to miss it. Okay. Andy. No. Jennifer. Yes. Alisha. Yes. Shalini Balmille. Yes. Pat. Oh. Anna Devlin, got here. I. Lynn Griezmer's and I'm Andy Johanicki. No. No. Annika Lopes. Hi. Ten in favor to oppose one abstention. No absence. Mandy. Now we, now are we ready to move on? Yes. Mandy job. So I wrote a memo. I'm going to make this as quick as possible. You should have read the memo. There are three things. CRC wants some. Input on from the rest of the council. They want to know who should adopt regulations. Who should have that authority. And there were options in the memo. Look at page two for those potential options. Others exist. Who should adopt fees. For the rental permitting. Options are in the memo on page three. And what the fee structure should look like. And the memo on pages three and four. Maybe even not a five sort of onto five. But I think that's a very specific part of this that you would like to focus on tonight. I mean, all of it. Two of them are just. Who gets the authority. And the other one is a structure. And for the structure, I don't want numbers for how much the fee should be. I want what do people prefer for a structure. Graduated, not graduated. Anything exempt or anything set at a certain limit. There's a lot of options in there. But I don't want to draft some. You know, The structures. Okay. Why don't we take one or two of these and just focus on that and see how far we can get in a brief period of time. So which one do you want to start with regulation authority? Okay. Regulation authority. Some of the options are outlined on page two. I'm going to start with the commissioners, town council, town council. With the building commissioner, town council. And board of licensed commissioners and building commissioner. And any mix thereof. You're muted. I think that the town council should be setting an all initial. Priorities and structure, but that the board of licensed commission should be able to amend the board of licensed commissioners. I'm across the board pretty much on that. That is the fifth bullet. Are there any other comments? Dorothy. This is a question. I wondered building commissioner or board of license. I will, I know Mandy Joe has really looked into this. So I'd love to hear her thoughts on either one, both of them. I think the board of licensed commissioners has indicated to me when I attended a meeting that they would be willing to. Have the authority in past CRC meetings, the building commissioner has expressed some. Concern with having the sole authority to particularly amend regulations. I'm feeling that. I think the feeling was that he would be more comfortable. If a body did it, not a staff member on their own. I think that's a good point. Thank you very much. So let me just clarify. So that means that. Going with Pat, it would be the town council. My staff has the authority to initially adopt. Then we turn it over to the board of licensed commissioners to amend. And. But the building commissioner still has a role. They just aren't. The building commissioner is one of the enforcers of yes point. Okay. So. Okay. Thank you. That helps me. Create some clear lines. If you will. Anna. I also support the one, two, three, four fifth bullet. I think that having a body like, like you just said, Mandy, when you were talking about what the building commissioner mentioned, having a body of community members being the group who's responsible or having authority to amend them. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that that feels better to me than having one individual be the sole decider. However, I think that it makes sense for the council to initially create the. Create them. So you're supporting bullet. Well, yeah. Michelle. I also support bullet number five. And I just have a question, Mandy. So the actual regulations, once they would be turned over for commissioners, what, like what sort of information, where would they be gathering information in order to make amendments? So I don't really know much about that committee and just wondering. What would trigger an amendment and where would they receive the appropriate information to make the amendment. So likely the same place the council would, if the council were seeking to amend anything, the building commissioner and the town inspectors are likely the ones that would seek an amendment. So I don't really know much about that. I don't really know much about that. I don't really know much about that. I don't really know much about the ECAC, depending on what's in the regulations, there's potential for energy efficiency requirements to be in them. And so maybe ECAC would recommend a modification of those requirements. The building commissioner or the person who handles our permitting in the inspection services department. Might. Ask for amendments to the application information that's requested that they're not using. So I don't really know much about that. I don't really know much about that. I don't know much about that. I don't really know much about that. I don't think that's the case. Since we're not the ones. Executing the bylaw or the regulations, you have to rely on the people who are executing it. To tell you when it's not working or one, when you need to add something and stuff like that. And the board has. A lot of experience. Adopting regulations, which is why they felt they'd be comfortable with this. Because they adopt a lot of regulations related to other licenses that they actually administer. We have a pretty much of a consensus around five. Bullet five. Okay. Then. Authority. Let's move on. Fee adoption. Right now. It's all. Council. Well, the, the bylaws actually split the way it's drafted right now, the town council for nearly everything, but the appeal fee. And the appeal sits with the board of license commissioners. I'm not sure that was an intentional thing other than just we're in the middle of drafts. So, you know, things fall through the cracks. But the same questions. Right. It's so enough. So again, now we're under page three. The top. Mandy Joe has outlined the four bullets. Options. And again, points out there's endless possibilities. One is the board of license commissioners sets all fees. Town council sets all fees. Town council doesn't. Initially, then board of license commissioner and men's. And then. We split it somehow. That seems sloppy to me, but that's just how I see it. Just as soon one body or the other. Anna. I mean, I'm going to say the split one, which is the third. Council sets the fees initially. Then board of license commissioner and men's. And then. We split it somehow. That seems sloppy to me, but I think it's important that we have the two. Right. So that's the third. Council sets the fees initially. BLC to amend in the future. I think it's also important to have consistency across the two. It's consistent with the earlier decision or the earlier feedback. We just gave you, I would agree. Anything else on that one? See, we shall always do this at 1130. I was hoping it would be easy. We just the CRC was like, we don't want to propose something that the council hates. This is the one that when it got referred to CRC this council really wanted us to come to you before we proposed something. So, there's a lot of options, even within the options there's a lot of options as you can see from just the few that I pulled. You know, to give you another example, Salem, I do not believe has a permit at all so they don't have a permit fee, but they have a requirement that the Board of Health inspect every dwelling unit that is a rental. And that inspection costs $50 per unit. And that fee covers the initial inspection and the first reinspection if it doesn't pass inspection. And after that it's $50 every time you have to go back. So, there's another potential option right there that the options are almost endless on how you want to do it. And we need help with how it wants to be done because that goes into how the bylaw is structured wording wise and permit wise and all of that. They interrelate. We're not going to read each of the children's that are there. But Mandy Joe has provided examples are the committee excuse me has provided examples from five or six different towns. Maybe Joe didn't. Okay. Pam admits that Mandy Joe didn't. Are there any particular ones that strike people's thoughts. Michelle. From my perspective, this is the most sticky of the items to decide on and something I want to give a little thought to I actually have received multiple constituent and have notes that I'm sorry I don't have right here with me. To provide that feedback to you in the CRC. I can put that together in the next day or so and just send it off to you. But I do think this is one for us to really consider with a lot of thought. And maybe we collect those and we put this put aside this particular discussion at on the 17th set. Jennifer, you have a preference. Yes, but I could go with your subject. I mean, no, I, no, I think we should get any thoughts out now and then if we have to will continue on the 17th. Yeah, I would say Burlington, and it doesn't have to be those exact dollar amounts, but I like it that it incentivize this owner occupancy, because we want to do that. So having I like the structure of a fee per unit, but there being a lesser fee for or, you know, small speaker owner occupied the transfer of ownership, I don't know if that even applies to us, but the something per unit. We can decide on that structured but with incentivizing owner occupied structures. Andy. I'm going to throw in another consideration, but I definitely would like to have some communication about what has been heard, and what was the feedback and various forums that you've had. I think it was all over the board from what I heard and whether you were able to draw conclusions from it. But in the end. We collect fees and we cannot commit that they are going to be used for hiring a specific employees inspectors being most likely to be of interest, given the work that's to be done that has to go through the regular budget process. It's easier to envision how that can happen if the fees are sufficient to cover the costs that are going to be needed to provide the inspections and other work that needs to be done. And so I would like to see some financial analysis that is done with some thought to help make sure that the numbers are going to work right. Kathy. What Michelle said about this is I need to think about this a bit more because what I'm what I don't have is a context, Mandy and others that have looked at this so you know clearly a new work is taking a break at a 14, a number, a certain unit per unit up to 14 and a lower fee 15 or more and I don't know whether some of these cities or towns have several very large buildings with like 400 units in them. And the rest small versus another one, you know I kind of know Burlington and I can't think of giant department buildings there. So, so the impact is different. I do the differential by size we Michelle and I have heard, at least in one meeting that you want to have a smaller fee for owner occupied and the person just got one rental unit, as opposed to multiple rental units. And that's where what I'm seeing is all the variation is above that several of them have something for multiple Boston is Boston's capping it so they, they get up to a certain amount and there must have been some rationale where they said, that's enough. You know so I don't know how harder, how complex it would be to provide some context. We've got giant cities here with much smaller cities, in terms of how many units could be in it, and what they're trying to achieve. You know, if I go, let me just flip it to you clearly didn't put New York City on this list, but in New York. There are large numbers of giant buildings with rental apartments, but they're less concerned about, except in certain parts of the city that the landlord will fail to put in smoke alarms, or the electrical thing because it's, it's high rent with people who would complain. So you've picked out, I think appropriately places that have large amounts of student rentals or places where landlords might be putting a lot of people in a specific place. So I just, I just need a better context to know on scale because that because you're asking your, there's three different kinds of variations going on, you know, capping it and cut off at certain pieces, and there's, you know, I could throw a dart at a board and pick one but that's that's just my request I don't know I wouldn't know how I normally can just look at something and say oh I like this one better than that one like well this would work this way that would work this way so I don't know what else you can get for us or I could get on my own, but I'll think about it. Yeah, I just want to add to the piece that we are, or I am analyzing the hundreds of data points that we've collected and so we will be reflecting that like what are from the landlord's perspective the fees and then from the tenant's perspective, how they feel the fees might be impacting them and so we will add that in and just in terms of Burlington yes they do have seven storied buildings right outside the town hall and stuff so I think it's pretty comparable actually with the population and similarity that way. Dorothy. I'm looking through all of these and it is easy to get confused but I noticed it in one of them I think it's bolder. It has the cost of inspection at 250 per unit I guess I thought I remembered some conversation with our building director as a superintendent about what he thought was a reasonable fee for the inspection of an apartment I'm just wondering if the committee remembers that or has an idea because the cost of these things is supposed to be related to the services given. But it takes time and effort to do an inspection and there's some paperwork that goes with it too. Does anyone have that from the committee. What Rob more I thought was a reasonable inspection fee for an apartment. So it's currently set at 150 per inspection. That's what we just voted back in May or whenever we voted that the committee has not discussed a fee structure at all yet other than a few thoughts as we've discussed other parts of the bylaw and so we definitely have not discussed what any amounts might be that's, that's a discussion once we figure out what the structure might look like and whether the, for example, whether the permit fee should cover the first inspection, the required initial inspection or not, or should that be an additional cost on top of the permit those things make a lot of difference in what the fees are. So some consideration at some point I thought that that buildings about which after the initial inspection about which there were no complaints. So that if the if the inspection fee is separate from the permit fee that somebody who doesn't need to be reinspected doesn't that save money for good behavior. Anyway, I trust your committee I think you guys have been working very very hard in this and I basically have trust in what you come up with. A quick question about the upcoming forum for community members is that going to be broken out into sections like where you're soliciting input about the fee or about you know very sections or is it just sort of a general forum that people can just come and say whatever about whatever. It will be split out similar to the first forum that had sort of specific topics we wanted feedback on but it will not be the same topics and it will actually be based on the similar concept that will be discussing at the Council on the 17th which is the actual working draft. And the language in that draft and then. So parts of that draft, what people might like what people might hate what people would change. And one of the things I'll be working on this week is a comparison table between what's in the working draft that CRC has right now. And what's in the current bylaws so people can see the differences between the two. And that will be part of the packet for the 17th, as well as the 24th community forum. My comments are the following. I want to make sure that we're not just doing a fee for fee sake so that it's a fee tied to a service. And that it's not and if it's a fee because and if the service is the because the landlord has not done something, then the landlord pays but if it's an issue where you know you've got seven cars parked outside a for a rental that's for four people that it's somehow or another the renter is also responsible. But what I don't want to see is just doing something that builds up the cost of rentals, which basically just then gets passed on to the renter. So that that's my only input at this point. Are there any other comments for this Andy. Yeah, I'm a person to rule 7.1 I'm going to make a motion to adjourn. It is now midnight. Is there a second to the motion. Okay. Is there any further discussion. Thank you Andy. Turn into a pump genders. We will. I think we're good for now. Okay. I just have one other quick thing. Can I just say it before we adjourn. Please make sure that you use the second email that I sent you with the word version for the town manager evaluation. I'm going to use the one that gives me the option of collecting all the data, because I don't want to have some in one and some in the other so use the one I will send you another copy tomorrow. Okay. And that we need to vote, we need to vote. All those in favor of adjourning. These say yes, and I have to do. I know, I know, I know, I'm trying to find space on my roll calls. I used them for so many other things. Okay, we're going to start with Dorothy Pam. Yes. Yes, I'm Rooney. Kathy Shane. Yes. Andy Steinberg. Yes. Jennifer top. Yes, Alicia Walker. Yes. Yeah, Planie Von Milne. Yes. Pat, Daniels, no. Audiden Develin, got here. Yes, then grease. Sexually, you know, Mandy Jo Hanneke I and Eika Lopes. Yes. Michelle Miller. Hi. It passes. There are 11 people say yes and two people say no. Nobody abstaining or nobody absent. The meeting's adjourned. Bye. Good move, Andy.